investing needs to be done by licensed professionals.
Actually the inverse of that is true. Investing or trading needs to be done by the individual his or herself. For it is the individual who truly cares about his or her money and future and not the so called professionals who may talk a good game but most can not back it up. (At least not unless they are bestowed with a good bull market.)
The person Gilbert attempts to project himself as is a good example of what many so called professionals truly are. (Sorry Gilbert but you yourself are to blame, I would like to thank you for presenting yourself to C2 as a great example of what not to be.) Just to clarify, no one is saying Gilbert is a professional he only exudes the persona of many.
Sure, there are exceptions just as there are doctors who dont prescribe body destroying drugs. Not many but they are out there. The professionals who are the best at convincing people they are honest and sincere are some of the biggest successes. Success being defined as how big their income is and not how well their clients have done.
Backtest Beau may be well on his way to a high level of success as a so called professional since he already has mastered the art of making excuses and it could only be assumed this is not the only area he excels in. Way to go Beau!
I don’t see where I’m making excuses. If you choose not to take research as evidence, and a system with 1 trade as proof, well, that’s your problem. As you say, [LINKSYSTEM_44396934] will rise to the top.
There’s no excuses, here, and it’s a really feckless comment. Morons who don’t know how to analyze relative market performance shouldn’t be disappointed when what they don’t understand collapses.
"cream always rises to the top".
I disagree.
In a rational (ex., capitalist) political system, the cream comes out on the top - Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc., This is the system of productiveness… rewarding the good…
In a irrational (ex. Communist) society, the worst one comes out on top. Stalin, Pol Pot, Moa etc., Ultimately such a society will lead to bankruptcy, because its idealogy is vicious (unujust), both in theory and in practice… This is the system of rewarding evil…
Looking at C2s most popular systems (most of them are irrational systems), I wonder what kind of a C2 society we are dealing with and where this is heading towards…
Men who are immune to facts and logic have no alternative but to traffic in fantasy. Without a proper epistemology, men do not use their minds properly, and their conclusions are correspondingly worthless. Some of our intellectuals are literal "know-nothings," especially in the field of their own specialization. They are know-nothings because of their specialization, i.e., because of the kind of metaphysics their years of training have instilled in them…
Man needs metaphysics to enable him to reach an integrated understanding of facts and a rational standard of evaluation. Without a proper metaphysics, therefore, facts (statistics) galore can be available, but men will not be able to grasp, connect, estimate, or learn from them. I am speaking here not only of corrupt intellectuals (Gilbert A.), but also of plain, decent men (too numerous to mention)…
If you dont see where you make excuses its only that you dont perceive them as excuses. You believe it is reality. It is those of us who read your excuses who see them for what they are. Excuses.
I am not what you would call a professional. So how about a little challenge. Pairs Trading QID QLD 2.0 against AllV. You will be shown what a non professional can do simply by thinking for himself. You may ? rise to the top but you will be below AllV. Just like the state flag is always flown beneath the national flag. Dont think this will be easy since 95% of the systems fail here, AllV is not an amateur.
You have a head start now lets see what you can do.
"cream always rises to the top".
I disagree.
For once, Palsun is correct. So does pond scum.
It is those of us who read your excuses who see them for what they are. Excuses.
No, what you think you know about me, you have only gotten from the recent posting and other more intelligent posters. Nothing you have said reflects any kind of previous knowledge as to my level of experience, and you have added nothing to the dialogue, just as your system adds nothing to the C2 landscape. You’re a brand new, no-name vendor, who will never be able to attract subscribers with such a terrible short system description as “Trades EOD Futures.” Even more deplorable is your horrendous attitude problem in your system description. I did you a favor by adding 33.33% more system views to ALLV. I already know from your description that you only wish you knew how to trade those instruments, so, knowing that you are no threat to a vendor like myself, I’ll let you choose:
1) Percentage profit on the underlying to end whenver you want, but it has to be set now.
2) First to ten trades. Whoever makes the most.
3) Whoever makes the most in 2010, so that it starts after Christmas, and you don’t have to worry about how terrible your vendor reputation will be after challenging me.
Every challenge is in reference to [LINKSYSTEM_44396934].
So which is it? I know for a fact, with an attitude like what you have brought to your system description, that you’re a paper trader through and through.
I do accept C2 stats, but if you want to take it to another site, we can.
I’ll leave it up to you, punk.
Now, to my polite response.
There are Professional Vendors. For me, they include myself, Keith Feitschen, Kevin Davey, Dr. Koch, vendor of DGamma, Chris Freeman of Exllence, and I have yet to put ETF Timer into that category without a better system description that most professional trading system developers would post.
I already know from your description that you do not fall into that category, and I’m doing you a favor just by talking about your system.
So, as this thread comes to an end, you believe for some reason that you have the remotest possibility of doing better than I do. I wouldn’t give you that, as it’s completely contained in your system description. You want subs for a time, to make a little money, and may believe you can keep it up, but know you have no strategy to start, and that, my friend, is why 95% fail. They do not spend the time planning and strategizing, spending hundreds of hours of screen time learning to analyze data. It’s very obvious you haven’t.
People believe I’m too young, when actually, I’m a millenial, which implies I have had a computer my entire life. I learned to type 30 WPM when I was 6. I know what a computer can do.
To you I don’t see any evidence of prepartion.
Thanks for the head start, but I will not be needing it.
Yes, I get all of that by a system’s description. You should get the vendor’s history, level of experience, trading knowledge, models, and outlook from a system description. I get none of that in yours, which clues me in to your cyber inexperience.–
Good Trading,
Good Luck,
Beau Wolinsky
[LINKSYSTEM_44396934]
You should get the vendor’s history, level of experience, trading knowledge, models, and outlook from a system description.
Here is where you go wrong. You believe all the stuff you equate with being a professional is what subscribers want, when subscribers simply want good numbers. Not good numbers in Beaus mind but good numbers in their own minds, the subscribers minds. In other words anyone giving a return of greater than 100% with less than 20% drawdown will have subscribers, just to give an example.
To you I don’t see any evidence of preparation.
The evidence will be in the track record Beau, I do believe that is what this is all about.
There may be some ups and downs in the equity curve but there will be a continuing rise to higher highs, and with a little luck (we create our own luck) the equity curve shall be reasonably good for an EOD system.
I suggest we check numbers at the end of each quarter. Starting now, and let any of those venders you mentioned decide who is doing the best.
Good chance you wont be hearing from me again as this isnt my style. After getting on to your style I just had to do a little research on you in the forums and many of your posts werent pretty.
Good Trading Beau
PS: If you dont mess your system up this time you might actually have a chance to win.
I really wonder if you realize what you did. Its in the posts.
Did I detect a little Dr Jekyll, Mr. Hyde in those two responses.
>Thanks for the head start, but I will not be needing it.
Not much of a head start. Just one trade. How can one be confident that your walk-forward testing validates your back-test with just one trade. You need at least 30 trades, before the system is even open to subscribers…
You seem to be saying something based on your convictions (statistical significance etc.,) but doing something else (completely different) ignoring your own convictions… This is history repeating itself… Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. That is what AIIV was alluding to and he has a valid point…
I’ve worked with systems enough to know when they will work going forward.
I’ve worked with systems enough to know when they will work going forward.
Beau,
Did you aquire this knowledge before or after you had over 37% draw, (and disgarded your system)?
I’ve always known Walt. Market drawsdown 56%, I drawdown 37%. High-risk-adjusted returns by that metric, especially when the market finishes down 35% to my up 38.7%. Plenty of outperformance. As a newbie to C2, tempering your expectations is probably better, because you then get emotional about whoever you subscribe to when it goes south, even if it is just a little.
And that’s just the S&P, Walt, have you ever looked at a chart of QID and QLD? Notice the 75% drawdowns? Of course by that metric it does even better. You’re not going to change my mind, because I know that PTQQ2 is the best system on this site, and I haven’t seen anything like it anywhere else.
Beau said "because I know that PTQQ2 is the best system on this site"
It is funny - you berate people here and at C2 who say the same sort of things, because you always say "unless you have real time track record, you’ve got nothing."
Wow man. I feel sorry for you. You really are delusional.
The best systems on this site right now are VT26 and ETF Timer. I never here these vendors saying a word about there systems. Do you know why? Its because the cream always rises to the top and there stats do the talking for them. If your stats are as good as theres after a year you will do very well, and I hope you do. What is the point though of arguing about it? Beau I think everyone can tell your very passionate about the markets(as much of us are) but instead of trying to defend your system let your system defend itself. Best, Paul
Good words, Paul. I’d like to leave this thread at that. I, as I’m sure a lot of other vendors who run multiple systems, always believe they have the best. There is some truth to the argument that goes just by luck they’ll rise to the top, then how do you know if they really are good systems? I’ve made my views known, and I never said ETF Timer was a bad system, just that I had thought by the Luck Coefficient it might not be. If we combined the last two QLD trades together the LC would still be below 10.
And that’s where I’d end it.
> The best systems on this site right now are VT26 and ETF Timer
I disagree and I can prove it and I have proved it. It doesn’t matter they have risen to the top. In an irrational society, the worst comes to the top. They don’t even have to crash to prove my point. Objective (not just subjective analysis of the equity curve alone) evaluation of a system will reveal that. You want to see the best systems at C2? See below: This is the result of my years of experience in evaluating trading systems using a rational standard. These 2 systems (VT26 and ETF Timer) doesn’t even meet the standard, but I analyzed them anyway (ignoring the standards).
I used the following criteria in the new grid: # trades > = 30, Age > 30 weeks (210 days), Annualized Return (Productivity) >= 100, CAGR >= 100 (if you can reach it, then it is not high), Max DD (Pride) <= 50, RF (Honesty) >= 50, Profit Factor (Self-esteem) > 1 and also reliable (Last 30 days return (Justice or reliability to make a profit) > 0, Last 60 days return > 0, Last 90 days return > 0, Open P/L >= 0) and then analyzed the resulting list using my proprietary formula (based on Expectancy Score). Also, I prefer Max. DD to be less than half the Annualized Return (Calmar Ratio > 2.0). If it is greater than that, it indicates that the vendor is taking excessive risks.
Rank Name Value Price Diff (-ve is undervalued) Sharpe Ratio Annualized Return CAGR Max. DD Calmar Ratio
1 Fortuna 630 532.00 -98.00 1.514 256.8 432.4 46.50 11.15
2 Zero 307 88.00 -219.00 2.696 113.3 101.4 25.60 4.79
3 Easy Button 237 150.00 -87.00 2.591 407.4 284.10 43.8 7.98
4 Barracuda 38 179.00 141.00 2.353 178.4 134.90 29.4 4.68
Total Annual Return: 955.9
Average Annual Return: 238.98
Total CAGR: 952.8
Average CAGR: 238.2
Total DD: 145.30
Average DD: 36.33
Total Calmar: 28.60
Average Calmar: 715
I did not include VT26 and ETF Timer in the above averages.
5 VT26 130 97.00 -33.00 2.954 75.9 60.7 10.10 6.26
6 ETF Timer 7 97.00 90.00 2.224 110.6 78.5 26.90 3.34
This clearly shows that both these systems (ETF Timer and VT26) are irrational systems at the bottom pile of C2s unproductive systems, though VT26 (with a value of 130) is a better irrational system than ETF Timer (with a value of just 7)…
>stats do the talking for them.
Man needs metaphysics to enable him to reach an integrated understanding of facts and a rational standard of evaluation. Without a proper metaphysics, therefore, facts (statistics) galore can be available, but men will not be able to grasp, connect, estimate, or learn from them. I am speaking here not only of corrupt intellectuals, but also of plain, decent men (too numerous to mention)…
Men who are immune to facts and logic have no alternative but to traffic in fantasy. Without a proper epistemology, men do not use their minds properly, and their conclusions are correspondingly worthless. Some of our intellectuals are literal “know-nothings,” especially in the field of their own specialization. They are know-nothings because of their specialization, i.e., because of the kind of metaphysics their years of training have instilled in them…
Wow! What a shocker. Paper Trading Palsun does his analysis, and guess who’s system comes out on top? Well, Palsun’s of course!!!
No conflict of interest here.
Hey Piker Palsun -
How did your other 21 systems that failed do with this criteria?
Did you develop the criteria on your own, or plagiarize it like you’ve been proven to do before?
Anyone who uses Plargiarizing Palsun’s criteria to make a decision deserves what he gets.
Beau,
Your attempt to make a 37%+ draw seem positive is delusional. Is that the excuse you tell your subscribers who lost over one third of their account? “You would have lost more with the S&P. Don’t worry, be happy”?
Since you know when systems will fail, why didn’t you go into cash BEFORE your system failed? What happened to your all knowing all seeing insight?
Nearly snorted up my lunch in laughter after reading this, just as an example:
I disagree and I can prove it and I have proved it. It doesn’t matter they have risen to the top.
Palsun World - “I have so many failed systems, because they are actually the ones that do best” And since I testified to it, what need we a track record?
In an irrational society, the worst comes to the top. They don’t even have to crash to prove my point
Palsun World - if you want to understand, go to the prisons and mental hospitals. Find out their trading methodology. Works for me!!!
